普通高中地理课程标准（2017年版）指出，地理教学要注重学生学习过程中的思维发展，教师可参考SOLO分类法评价学生的思维结构。SOLO缩写自“Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome”，意为可观察的学习结果的结构，是一种对学生学习结果的数量和质量进行等级描述质性评价方法，使得学生在学习过程中的认知发展水平可见、可评。研究运用SOLO分类法指导高中地理教学实践的策略及有效性，既是课程标准的要求，又是推进课堂教学改革，提升地理教学质量的重要途径。

本研究对SOLO分类法进行详细阐述和分析后，基于SOLO分类法精心编制调查问卷，设计SOLO等级评价模型，以广东省佛山市某中学高一年级两个班级为样本调查高一学生对学习内容的理解水平。进行教学设计时，首先，运用SOLO分类法评估学生的基础知识水平以确定教学起点；其次，分析课程标准内容要求的SOLO层次，在其指导下制定教学目标并划分SOLO层次；再次，在SOLO分类法的指导下，设计具有内在关联性的、思维结构水平递增的有效问题链条；从次，根据教学内容SOLO层次划分结果，遵循学生的认知发展规律优化教学顺序；最后，从教学方法角度，得出以下主要指导意见：从前结构水平到单点结构水平及从单点结构水平到多点结构水平宜采用启发式讲授法、读书指导法、地理实验法等教学方法，从多点结构水平到关联结构水平宜采用问题式教学法、讨论法、案例教学法和练习法等教学方法，从关联结构水平发展到抽象拓展水平宜采用讨论法、练习法和探究式教学法等教学方法。在作业批改时，教师在作业本上以“学生答案思维水平/参考答案思维水平”为格式评价学生的答案质量。根据以上策略，教师选取高中地理必修一第三章《地球上的水》为内容开展教学实践，以两个班级为样本开展教育实验。

本研究为在高中地理教学实践应用SOLO分类法提供了一定的理论指导和案例。调查问卷结果表明，七道题目中的四道题目，多达三分之二左右的学生答案思维水平集中于多点结构及以下水平，剩下三道题目也有近三分之一的学生答案处于多点结构及以下水平。教育实验发现，前测成绩无显著差异的实验班级和对照班级，后测考试成绩和后测思维结构水平都差异极显著。由于教育实验样本较小，实验结果的内部效度较高，而外部效度较低。此外，常规课堂对于学生反馈的统计和分析的效率较低，致使SOLO分类法的课堂监控、调节作用还不够理想。

研究结果显示，总体而言高一学生的思维结构水平不够理想。与常规的教学模式相比，基于SOLO分类法的高中地理教学符合学生的认知发展规律，能明显促进学生的思维结构水平发展，提高学生的考试成绩，提升高中地理教学效果。

As stated in the 2017 Version of the National Geography Curriculum Standards for General High School, to strengthen students’ development of thinking in the process of geography learning, teachers should refer to the SOLO Taxonomy to evaluate students’ thinking pattern. SOLO, abbreviated from Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, means an observable structure of learning outcome and a qualitative evaluation method to provide level descriptors for the quantity and quality of students’ learning outcome, enabling the visualization and evaluation of students’ Cognitive development level in learning process. The research on the strategy and effectiveness of implementing the SOLO Taxonomy in high school geography teaching and practice answers to the requirements of the National Curriculum Standards, serving as one of the important starting points in promoting teaching reform and enhancing the quality of geography teaching.

Beginning from the elaboration and detailed analysis of the SOLO Taxonomy and designing a well-thought questionnaire based on the SOLO Taxonomy, the present research has come up with a SOLO evaluation model to examine students’ comprehension levels of new learning content, using samples from two classes of Senior One at a High School in Foshan, Guangdong. When designing the teaching plan, the teaching starting point is based on students’ basic knowledge level which is evaluated using the SOLO Taxonomy. The teaching goals are then categorized as SOLO levels according to the National Curriculum Standards. Furthermore, with reference to the SOLO Taxonomy, effective and interrelated problem chains with increasing thinking structure levels are specified. Additionally, referring to the SOLO Taxonomy, the categorization of thinking structure levels for teaching content and teaching goals exemplify optimized teaching in accordance with the pattern of students’ cognitive development. Lastly, from prestructural level to unistructural level, the lecturing method, reading and directing method as well as visual demonstration method, etc. should be employed. From multistructural level to relational level, problem-based teaching, discussion method, case study method and drill, etc. should be adopted. From the relational level to extended abstract level, discussion method, drill and exploratory learning should be used. As for homework correcting, teachers should evaluate the quality students’ answers using the format of students’ thinking levels reflected in the answers divided by the thinking levels of the reference answers. Based on the above strategies, the present study has chosen Chapter 3, The Water on Earth from Compulsory One, High School Geography as teaching content and conducted teaching practice and experiment with two class samples.

The present research has succeeded in providing a certain degree of theoretical guidance and example for applying SOLO Taxonomy to high school geography teaching practice. As the results of the questionnaire revealed, approximately over two thirds of students’ thinking levels indicated in the answers concentrate around the multistructural level or below in the four exercise questions out of seven questions. Among the three remaining questions, the answers of nearly one third of students locate in multistructural level or below. In the subsequent teaching experiment, it was found that while the experimental class and control class showed no significant differences in the pretest, they show remarkable difference in the posttest scores and thinking structural levels. Due to small size of the educational experiment sample, the internal validity of the experiment results is relatively high, whereas the external validity ranks low. In addition, on account of the comparatively low efficiency of students’ thinking level feedback, sorting and analysis, SOLO Taxonomy still proves not ideal enough in terms of class monitoring and regulating.